...Christ, I wish people would deal in real world realities in these columns! Way before any fanciful solutions to flood-stricken areas of Ipswich are considered, what of the criminality of officials who oversaw the construction of building estates on land with the potential of six meters and more of flood water covering the houses!

...And the fraudulent and criminal intent of the majority of insurance companies, who for years on end took money under false pretenses as insurance premiums to cover flood damage in these areas, only to reject claims in the final event of a flood! This is the “private sector insurance industry which generates gross premium revenue of $33.4 billion a year and has assets of $101.7 billion”.

...Yes…The Insurance Council of Australia officially refuses to insure households in flood zones, (I was always under the impression that insurance was designed to “spread the risk”), but not anymore apparently; at least not when profits and shareholder interest supersede all other interests!

...Flood mitigation falls onto the lap of the taxpayer; building estates built in known flood zones were also sanctioned by authorities payed for by the tax payer: This is a situation which is way past a joke.

...I view a situation in Ipswich which reads a “baying for the blood” of those responsible as the priority! After that, then let us talk of solutions as we sit around some-others camp fire!

Posted by diver dan, Monday, 11 February 2013 9:00:55 AM

Well, lets get real and stop all building approvals on flood plains, which by and large, are our most fertile agricultural land. Mobile homes that can be quickly moved to higher ground are an option. But only with the installation/application of extremely early warning systems! That said, we could simply move most of the Australian population onto higher ground; by one, discontinuing DA on flood plains, and by insurance companies refusing to insure said homes. I live in a mountainous flood free area, yet my premiums have doubled and doubled again and again. We need to start seeing our river systems as completely integrated holistic systems; and manage them in the same way. We need to build many small dams and weirs in every gorge or gully. Given these features are invariably the product of centuries of erosion, and still water, [lakes ponds,] remains the very best way of stopping the erosion and the huge amounts of alluvium, that comes with it, which now clogs our waterways with vast amounts of material; that further contributes to wider more terrible floods. None of which will become less ferocious or fearsome, in a climate changed future. Dredging and using this same material to create levy banks, probably will minimise some of the harm caused by routine flooding, as will raising roads, rail lines and bridges. However, the real work needs to occur in the mountains, where virtually every flood event has its birth! We need to create myriad small dams, that quite literally force trillions of ton of water into the landscape, that then slowly releases it, with the drier times. Simple, small and designed to manage flow rates, rather than simply store water, is the answer! As is high country reafforestation! As is work for the dole schemes, to provide the green army, we would need, to build them!? Rhrosty.

Posted by Rhrosty, Monday, 11 February 2013 11:29:58 AM

Gradually widening water courses is one of the solutions in the short term. Higher ground can be created from the material recovered combined with thousands of tonnes of daily waste. I'm sure that even if this were tried just to see how it works it would open the eyes & minds of those in positions to instigate it. I guarantee that the next big flood will be less detrimental by eliminating the present bottlenecks from too much built-up river fronts. Just imagine the insurance companies running out of excuses to up the premiums & refusing to pay.

Posted by individual, Monday, 11 February 2013 6:54:37 PM

work for the dole schemesRhosty,Yes & it reinforces my call for a Non Military National Service. To drag a mature age father on unemployment away from the family is not too demoralising for the family unit. What is needed is to grab all 19 year olds & have them do National Service until age 21 i.e. adult age or supposedly mature. This would open up job opportunities for many by way of more responsible people & the opening up of more positions because you now have the right mentality people to enter the work force. If we can pay billions for the armed forces to lounge around doing sfa then we should have sufficient for a few million to put the many young unemployed on the right path. Put the voting age up to 21 & let them whine & whinge while doing something for the community.